One might think this should be a slam dunk, despite the unfavorable 30-70 turf split resulting from redistricting: a youthful, social-media utilizing, Peduto & Preston backed wonkabilly insurgent, versus a crusty and out-of-touch on “social issues” (AKA basic civil and human rights) perma-incumbent who’s never benefitted from the exercise one gets from facing serious challenges. We’ve seen this one play out almost a dozen times in recent years. The only way we can see it changing today is if Continue reading →

A “problem” is something that can be solved. A “predicament” is something that must be endured, for which there is no real solution. (City Ethics)

While the Wilson Center situation bears all the hallmarks of a political predicament, it is surely more responsible for civic leaders to treat it as a problem, so long as its fate is still undetermined. We’ll do the same.

Even by the standards of, “a Mayor gets to take credit for everything,” and, “some of these things are still works in progress,” this is pretty tight. Chock-a-block.

Over sixty exhibits in the categories of neighborhood investment (hooray for soliciting original proposals in the Strip!), government restructuring & reform (hooray for reinvigoration at OMI!), and innovation (hooray for open data!).

While we have accomplished a lot in our first 100 days, we have a long way to go to realize our potential as a city poised for greatness. Through every stage of our work — from studying the best ways to fill potholes to striving for cutting-edge neighborhood development models — we have one message for both our residents and the world. Our single focus, from the first 100 days to the next 1,000, is to make comprehensive changes to fashion a city government that serves all residents and makes all of Pittsburgh stronger for generations to come. (Early Returns)

9 board members: 3 appointed by Mayor, 3 appointed by City Council, and 3 from “community groups” with strictures to ensure representation of highly affected Council Districts. Each the five geographical regions of the City must be represented by at least one board member.

It will prioritize the creation of low-income housing as determined by a percentage in its Policies and Procedures, all of which will be determined during five televised meetings across the City.

The Land Bank will work with the city’s Summer Youth Employment Program and other locally-sourced labor for property maintenance.

A hold will be placed on the transfer of any property if the board receives 15 signatures from nearby residents, whereupon it will hold a special local hearing in the community.

And finally… for the first 2-4 years of the Land Bank’s lifespan… City Council will retain veto power over every property transaction.

No word on whether that final major concession will result in any increase in political factional goodwill or cooperation.

The abundant list of speakers was indeed front-loaded towards those in support. Jeanne Clark, formerly of PennFuture delivered the most stunning uppercut, vouching for the environmental protections embedded in that proposed contract.

I think that the discussion in process has lacked the depth and the genuine desire to collaborate that’s necessary for communities to fully buy-in — and when I say “communities” I mean those most impacted. So what we have right now is a City Council that is divided, and this is happening mostly around racial and class lines. And that causes me great consternation relative to pushing this forward so quickly. So my question is one around the urgency. You know, why was this bill introduced the second week of City Council, being in session on January 14th, and what is the urgency of pushing through a bill that’s going to impact every single City neighborhood without really doing that deep dive. Also, I’d like to say that Councilman O’Connor talked a little bit about the City-owned properties and those not being able to be moved over without first having City Council approval, but the reality is that these neighborhoods that are most impacted have a high level of tax delinquent properties which are privately owned — and those properties could be moved over much more quickly. That’s a major concern. And so I’d really like to ask Councilwoman Gross also: are we repeating history? Are we missing our opportunity to change the direction our legacy has put us in? I think that we’re missing an opportunity to have that deeper-dive conversation. Land banks in other cities were most impactful because those cities were hit very hard by the mortgage crisis, which Pittsburgh did not experience that same level of crises. So I’d like to just ask the councilors to slow this process down, to engage in a deeper conversation with the communities that are mostly impacted, and I’d like to get some responses to that. (WESA)

Quickly, although Pittsburgh eluded the mortgage crisis by default, we did suffer the collapse of the steel industry and an insane 50% population dip, not to mention the loss of all that capital. So I would argue those crises are fairly similar.